Sure. Business users are my 40% handwave - I'm assuming they are all behind
firewalls, and many of them behind NAT. It doesn't surprise me that SMBs
are (almost) all behind NAT.
Brian
David Higginbotham wrote:
>
> just a brief review of local administrator peers at small and medium
> business (+/- 10 admin's/business, avg 25 to hosts per/ea) is 100% with
> 'always on' connectivity behind firewall and NAT. very small sample but 100%
> is significant
> David H
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 3:10 PM
> To: Paul Hoffman / IMC
> Cc: Frank Solensky; Jiri Kuthan; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Again: Number of Firewall/NAT Users
>
> Exactly. More or less by definition, since NATs and firewalls hide
> stuff, we can't possibly measure the stuff they hide.
> And since they are hiding stuff for good reason, administrators
> more or less by definition will not answer accurately. So it can't
> be measured.
>
> My hand waving estimate is that 40% (160M) of users are behind a firewall
> and/or NAT, 50% (200M) on dial-up, and 10% (40M) have direct always-on
> access.
> But there is no way I can justify these numbers.
>
> Brian
>
> Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
> >
> > At 12:10 PM -0500 1/23/01, Frank Solensky wrote:
> > >One could ask a sample of administrators and extrapolate the results
> > >but, again, the problem becomes how confident you could be of the
> > >results if you don't get a very significant response rate
> >
> > The problem is *much* worse than that. You have to be confident that
> > your sampling method actually reflects enough of the Internet to be
> > valid. Determining how you have reached a valid sample of
> > administrators would be an interesting problem. Further, it is safe
> > to assume that administrators for the largest networks are the least
> > likely to reply, or to reply accurately.
> >
> > And then there is the problem of assuming that they understand your
> > question, and can even count the systems on their networks well
> > enough to answer accurately...
> >
> > --Paul Hoffman, Director
> > --Internet Mail Consortium
